PETA on the move...

[Mike Orton]

Not entirely archery related but we none-the-less should be aware of what the enemy is up to...

Fedblog: PETA Goes Fishing for Federal Lighthouses
By Tom Shoop
Outside the bureaucracy, looking in.

Thursday, August 9, 3:40 p.m. ET:

The General Services Administration has a program under which it transfers lighthouses owned by the federal government to other governmental organizations and nonprofits, if they agree to take care of the properties. Now the group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals wants to take GSA up on its offer. The organization is interested in taking over a bunch of different lighthouses.


Full column:   http://blogs.govexec.com/fedblog

[Artur]

Well, I guess it just means that PETA has been cheating its contributors. They want to spend all that money on things that have nothing to do with animal rights, after all....

[OzarkRamblr]

A "fish empathy quilt"???

What a bunch of wackos.

[Al Dente]

PETA, HSUS, Doris Day, Fund for Animals, Sierra Club, etc... are all very well funded by Hollywood, Publicly traded companies, and in some cases OUR own tax dollars.  They have the financial resources to these outageous things, make outrageous claims, and outrageously...get away with it.  They are well oiled machines.  They support eco-terorists such as ELF and ALF, send representatives to speak in public schools to elementary students, hand out leaflets depicting scandalous lies about animal treatment, and hang billboards that spew their bile for all to see.

They also euthanize over 2,500 dogs and cats each year, utilize medications (that were tested on animals) to make sure that they're still alive, and are not held accountable for it at all.

[Artur]

I don't agree with the message being put out by groups such as PETA, either... Nor do I agree with the idea that only those who have proven themselves to be completely non-violent should be allowed to even handle a fire-arm... I don't even like that the Guaranteed Freedoms listed in the Constitution of The United States of America are being whittled down to a short list of Granted Privileges. But I am one of those "Bleeding-Heart Liberals" a lot of you Ultra-Conservative types hate so much.

Don't like the message? Then don't support it. Don't agree with the messenger? Then don't listen to them. But DO NOT tell me that I am a "terrorist" just because I hold to a different ideal than yours! Or have you "forgotten" that folks such as "honest" Rush Limbaugh use the very same tactics as you claim to denounce so loudly?

DAMN, but I hate hypocrites!

[Adam Mooney]

What freeks. these people are nothing but crazy. If it wasnt for people taking animals for food none of use would be here

[vermonster13]

Artur you seem to be making a lot of assumptions in your post and the tone certainly isn't going to win you many friends. I have yet to see anyone declare you a terrorist over your beliefs. The groups Al listed are on terrorist watch lists. Actions have defined them and earned them their places there. Perhaps some learning through research on them would bring about some understanding of the feelings many here have for them.

[Al Dente]

Those that I have spoken about have either been convicted of crimes such as arson, breaking and entering, vandalism, or dumping of euthanized canine/feline corpses in privately owned dumpsters.  And then there's the case of the PETA official who condemns the clinical testing of medicines on animals, but utilizes the very insulin derived from the tests.  She cites the fact that it's important for HER to live so that she can continue to fight for the animals.  Those are hypoctites.

We as sportsmen, have done more to save the flora and fauna of the entire world than ALL of these so-called "activists".  We are conservationists, not elitist terrorists who feel that they are above the law.

We are the first to condemn the poachers, the litter-bugs, and the forest-fire starters.  When's the last time any animal rights "activist" has condemned a criminal act committed by one of their own?  They don't denounce them, they embrace them, shelter them, fund their defenses, and keep them on the payroll.

I guess it's alright to cut down old-growth trees in order to block the road entering a state park to prevent hunters from participating in their LEGAL pasttime.  Way to go in saving the environment.  Save your rhetoric and your whining, you can't put a spin on the truth.

[Artur]

It was pointed out that groups such as SIERRA CLUB -- one of the most pro-environment groups around, and happens to work towards SUSTAINABLE ecology -- supports such groups as ELF and ALF; simply be cause of that support, so some people would have everyone believe, groups such as Sierra club are guilty of the same "eco-terrorism" as ELF and ALF.

I pointed out that according to Ultra-Conservatives -- people who would have everyone believe that any group speaking out against "raping" the environment, including groups such as SIERRA CLUB, are "eco-terrorists" who should be either imprisoned or shot (or both) -- use the very same tactics as those "eco-terrorist" groups to get your attention.

I pointed out that I am one of those so-called "Bleeding-Heart Liberals" those Ultra-Conservatives hate so much -- because I happen to agree with the purpose of groups such as Sierra Club.

I also tell people, in no uncertain, ambiguous terms, that I WILL NOT tolerate being called a "terrorist" just because I do not follow their dogmatic beliefs. And I get jumped on for it.

Al Dente, you say "you can't put a spin on truth". Rush tried that very thing back in the 1990's: He said that There are more total forested acres in the U.S. 'today' than back in the 1700's. He was correct, but only in one way: Back in the 1700's, the U.S. was comprised of ONLY the North East Coastal area, and only AFTER 1776! Nice way to spin the truth, Mr. Limbaugh....

If all you "hear" is what they want you to "hear", then you have allowed them to do what they set out to do: Screw you over. And it does not matter one bit which "side" does it, either.

Attacking me ain't gonna change that.

[vermonster13]

Actually Artur you're doing the attacking. You are assuming the folks here are "ultra-conservatives". No one has attacked you, but they have pointed out flaws in your statements. The Sierra Club has changed quite a bit over the past few years and I wouldn't place them with PETA or HSUS myself anymore, but that could change when they change who's in charge again. You took statements about these groups personally and not a one of those statements was aimed at you before you made your post.

[Jim Harris]

Well said Vermonster!!

[Mike Orton]

So,,,,exactly what do Arthur's comments have to do with the thread I posted regarding the purchase of old Lighthouses by PETA?  Why is it that this thread has become a battleground for Arthur defending his imaginary honor, I don't recall anyone referring to him personally as a "terrorist".  Based upon my observations of Arthur's passionate comments it appears that he might have "anger management issues" but even that I am unconcerned about, since the topic of the thread was merely a notification to interested Trad Gang members of what PETA was currently up to re: the purchase of Light houses.

Dude, chill out...no one is attacking you personally in this thread and in fact, until you recently distinguished yourself as having issues regarding Terrorism phobia I do not believe I had even crossed your path on the Trad Gang.  In instances such as this I thank the good Lord for the delete button.      

[Artur]

As stated previously: If all you "hear" is what they want you to "hear", then you have allowed them to do what they set out to do: Screw you over. Have I actually said that any one particular person, or group of persons, on this forum is an ultra-conservative -- or do you simply believe that I have, based on my choice of words? Who, exactly, have I said is an ultra-conservative?

Back in the days of Ronald Reagan, "tax increase" became "revenue enhancement" -- and has now become "user fees" (Minnesota governor Pawlenty's favorite term for "Tax Increases").

Now, what, exactly, did I say, and what do you THINK I meant? Apply the same excercise to everything said by "your" favorite "eco-terrorist group".

"Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know." --- Donald Rumsfeld

Are you confused? I'm not. Mr. Rumsfeld merely said that there are things yet to be discovered, among a couple of other things.

[vermonster13]

"But I am one of those "Bleeding-Heart Liberals" a lot of you Ultra-Conservative types hate so much."

Who are we to think you were referring to here?

[Artur]

Originally posted by vermonster13:
Who are we to think you were referring to here?

If you think of yourself as ultra-conservative, that is your prerogative. As for PETA buying lighthouses: That's their prerogative, they can spend their donor's money any way they want for as long as those donors allow.

Which was the reason I posted in this thread to begin with. Too bad others decided to read my words in other posts and interpret them according to what they wanted those words to say....

Not all Political Liberals are "tree-huggers" -- nor are all Political Conservatives "pro-Personal Freedom". It has nothing -- and everything -- to do with YOUR hunting privileges (There is nothing in the Constitution which guarantees the "right" to hunt). And before anyone jumps to yet any more conclusions, I happen to be pro-hunting AND pro-conservation AND pro-environment; I am NOT pro-go-out-in-the-woods-and-kill-whatever-crosses-my-path, though, and I really don't believe any of those posting here are, either -- regardless how groups like PETA may wish people to think otherwise.

Really, why complain about what PETA is doing if it has no real bearing on your own activities? And why play into "their" hands by acting in the manner they want everyone else to believe you act in? The "Either you're for us or against" mentality has got to go.

[vermonster13]

You need to do some research on some of these groups Artur and see how much the things these folks do are impacting your hunting and fishing rights. If you believe that the buying of the lighthouses doesn't play into their agenda some way, you are being naive.

Also the way you posted your thoughts reads as total baiting. If I truly believed that you had an agenda similar to theirs do you think you'd have a post left?

[rnharris]

these organizations have one thing in their agenda and that is to eliminate your right to hunt and enjoy the outdoors period! they may smile or lie while they are doing it but that is what they are after.They are more concerned with animals than human beings,i respect the animals i hunt and take that is something they can't understand. sportsman we need to get in the fight they will not quit until they have achieved their agenda i want my children to enjoy the freedom iv'e enjoyed be informed.

[Mike Orton]

Arthur, you are an interesting individual....

 

Not all Political Liberals are "tree-huggers" -- nor are all Political Conservatives "pro-Personal Freedom". It has nothing -- and everything -- to do with YOUR hunting privileges (There is nothing in the Constitution which guarantees the "right" to hunt). And before anyone jumps to yet any more conclusions, I happen to be pro-hunting AND pro-conservation AND pro-environment; I am NOT pro-go-out-in-the-woods-and-kill-whatever-crosses-my-path, though, and I really don't believe any of those posting here are, either -- regardless how groups like PETA may wish people to think otherwise.

[/b]  

If you really "don't believe any of the posting here are, either" than why do you have so much to say?  Sir, you have taken a very long winded approach toward saying nothing....I suspect you would like to say something but are falling somewhat short of reaching that goal.

I beleive you would be an interesting man to share a campfire with some evening, although admittedly I would need to visit your campfire rather than inviting you to mine.  You appear a bit radical in your thinking and I do not believe that your presence would add to the harmony in my camp.
 

[Al Dente]

The reason EVERYONE here should care about what PETA, and others of the same ilk are doing, is because of their ultimate agenda.  And one part of that agenda is to end any and all forms of hunting.

And it is not just with their donors money.  Over 40 million dollars was given to PETA and HSUS from the USF&W under Presidents Clinton's regime.  When questioned about it, it was A- unaccounted for, B- unexplained, and C- swept under the rug and forgotten.  

We, as hunters should care because those funds were taken directly from OUR purchases under Pittman-Robinson.  They are to be solely used for state DNR's and conservation departments.

[Artur]

Would someone please post a direct source quoting these "hunting and fishing rights" I keep hearing about? I mean, unless a person happens to be an enrolled member of a FEDERALLY RECOGNIZED Native American Tribe, those supposed "rights" do not exist.

As I said once already, there is absolutely no mention of "hunting and/or fishing rights" in the Constitution of The United States of America, including all 27 amendments to that Document. Any laws passed by Congress -- or State Legislatures -- merely grant or rescind privileges, not "rights".

And the rug-sweeping-under isn't the province of only the "Liberal" people. "Conservatives" want to blame the economy on "Liberals", they want to blame everything on "Liberals" -- and somehow "forget" that fiascoes such as Enron and the Exxon Valdez took place during "Conservative Regimes". Anyone really want to talk about fiscal responsibility and whether or not tax-payer monies are going where they should be going? Or do you want only to point fingers and shift blame to whomever happens to be the "enemy"? (I remember learning in History classes how during WW1, German-Americans - CITIZENS of the USA - were generally suspected of being "spies for the Kaiser". It was "Us or Them", and "Us" lost out to fear- and hate-mongering. Now, you want to do it again, with the non-hunter in the role of German-American.)

If you REALLY want to keep your hunting and fishing PRIVILEGES, stop blaming the 'other guy' and start taking responsibility for putting into Office those who, figuratively speaking, later stab you in the back. Try looking deep into THEIR motives, by way of who they take contributions from and who they really support. But, they say what you want to hear, so they must be on your "side"....